Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,586
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    LopezElliana
    Newest Member
    LopezElliana
    Joined

New England Storm Dicussion - January 11-12


Baroclinic Zone

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

GFS starts to feel the tug of H5 forcing and is a little south of 18z, in the GOM. Ryan was right, the heights were a little flatter out here and just to the east. Whether it's right, not sure. I do think meso models are probably going to have a say as well, but globals are stable too and I would not completely ignore them. Def has a big difference in outcomes for se mass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like the GFS is just ignoring every single rule of thumb of modeling.

below

Well for me the good news is I get decent snow or more no matter what solution today. Would prefer NAM/RGEM but would be ok with GFS.

Yep

I don't even have the GFS updated in front of me yet and reading through the last page is kind of funny and disturbing at the same time :lol:

Simple answer: wait for the ensembles

Why would we want to wait for a lower resolution model at this stage?

How many times have we seen this... NAM way amped up, juiced up, and close to the coast while the GFS is much more sane.

All the time. Here's the better question...how many times in the last five days have the RGEM and NAM gone balls deep on a huge westward low and miserably failed.....about ten times is the answer.

Like we've all agreed I think wait for the Euro. It's been dead consistent for 5 runs, whichever way it moves should tell us which way we should be leaning.

The RGEM had me in the CCB a couple of times the other day, the NAM had a regionwide blizzard at least once and good snows from the comma head a bunch of times. GFS said no go, Euro pretty much too and was right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GFS starts to feel the tug of H5 forcing and is a little south of 18z, in the GOM. Ryan was right, the heights were a little flatter out here and just to the east. Whether it's right, not sure. I do think meso models are probably going to have a say as well, but globals are stable too and I would not completely ignore them. Def has a big difference in outcomes for se mass.

It's stronger in the upper levles than the 18z run. I don't see why it should be tucked in a bit closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GFS starts to feel the tug of H5 forcing and is a little south of 18z, in the GOM. Ryan was right, the heights were a little flatter out here and just to the east. Whether it's right, not sure. I do think meso models are probably going to have a say as well, but globals are stable too and I would not completely ignore them. Def has a big difference in outcomes for se mass.

Yeah seeing the GFS flatten heights out here in NE is a bit worrisome. I would take the GFS over the NAM in trying to figure out the overall synoptic setup. However I do think the NAM may be on to something in pulling things a bit further NW given the intense cyclogenesis we're likely to see as that bowling ball heads east.

So I'd probably take the GFS and shift the heaviest QPF a bit NW along with the 850/700mb low centers as well.

8"-14" pretty safe call for many areas at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GFS slightly stronger but overall position of the low very similar...overall not enough change from 18z to go nuts here, need something more than what I just saw, one run cannot sway things, I wanna see the ARW when it starts honing in on the fine details.....tomorrows 12z ARW will be big

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...